> On Jan. 30, 2017, 1:23 a.m., Michael Park wrote: > > src/common/protobuf_utils.cpp, lines 332-335 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/diff/1/?file=1613193#file1613193line332> > > > > Is there a reason why we don't just mutate it in-place? > > ```cpp > > void adjustOfferOperation( > > Offer::Operation* operation, > > const Resource::AllocationInfo& allocationInfo); > > ```
Sounds good to me. > On Jan. 30, 2017, 1:23 a.m., Michael Park wrote: > > src/common/protobuf_utils.cpp, lines 340-341 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/diff/1/?file=1613193#file1613193line340> > > > > I think it'd be clearer for us to write: > > > > ```cpp > > foreach (TaskInfo& task, *result.launch().mutable_task_infos()) { > > // ... > > } > > ``` Now I remember why I avoided this, note that it has to be mutable the whole way through: ``` foreach (TaskInfo& task, *operation->mutable_launch()->mutable_task_infos()) { // ... } ``` I'll work around this by storing the launch and other operations into variables. > On Jan. 30, 2017, 1:23 a.m., Michael Park wrote: > > src/common/protobuf_utils.cpp, lines 343-348 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/diff/1/?file=1613193#file1613193line343> > > > > We basically do this for every repeated resources field within > > `Offer::Operation`. Can we introduce a function similar to > > `adjustOfferOperation`? > > > > ```cpp > > void adjustResources( > > RepeatedPtrField<Resource>* resources, > > const Resource::AllocationInfo& allocationInfo); > > ``` > > > > The `injectAllocationInfo` helper which operates on `FrameworkInfo` > > I think should just be: > > > > ```cpp > > auto injectAllocationInfo = []( > > RepeatedPtrField<Resource>* resources, > > const FrameworkInfo& frameworkInfo) > > { > > if (protobuf::frameworkHasCapability( > > frameworkInfo, > > FrameworkInfo::Capability::MULTI_ROLE) { > > return; > > } > > > > Resource::AllocationInfo allocationInfo; > > allocationInfo.set_role(frameworkInfo.role); > > adjustResources(resources, allocationInfo); > > }; > > ``` Added a lambda to simplify this implementation. Will look into your suggestion for the subsequent patch. - Benjamin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/#review163448 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 23, 2017, 10:59 p.m., Benjamin Mahler wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 23, 2017, 10:59 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, Jay Guo, Guangya Liu, and Michael > Park. > > > Bugs: MESOS-6967 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6967 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Previously, `Resource` did not contain `AllocationInfo`. So for > backwards compatibility with old schedulers and tooling, we must > allow operations to contain `Resource`s without an `AllocationInfo`. > > This introduces a function which allows the master to inject the > offer's `AllocationInfo` into the operation's resources. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/common/protobuf_utils.hpp faa7e2a759fd2b1ce5def662679f573ec6fefd28 > src/common/protobuf_utils.cpp dd20759affe3adf2867a33bf875c9ee82862038d > src/tests/protobuf_utils_tests.cpp bc2a3d0ebe544a58d0de8f2f7174c170113ddf2e > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/55863/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Added a test. > > > Thanks, > > Benjamin Mahler > >
